A Look at Baptism compared with Historical Christian Teachings
COMPARING THE BIBLE, EARLY CHURCH HISTORY AND WHAT THE INTERNATIONAL CHURCHES OF CHRIST HAVE TAUGHT OVER THEIR HISTORY.
I believe it is important to base our faith on that which is unchanging ie Christ. I also believe that looking and studying the early church, and early Christianity will help in my growth as a Christian. Through the use of scripture, and not being afraid to question that which I was told to be true, the following article evolved. Out of my own need for scriptural, and historical evidence; about baptism I began a look at what had been said about it.
A study of the scriptures on baptism, and using Kip McKean's and other ICC leader's own words from sermon's, taken in full context also proved quite enlightening for me personally.
We are reminded in 2 Cor 4 :"Rather we have renounced secret and deceptive ways ; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the Word of God." not to act with deceit or deception; not to change the word of God.
History is as relevant to today, as it was at the time. For if we do not learn from history, we are condemned to repeat the mistakes from history. Also though man may try to change history, it has an often unseen ability to come back to haunt his attempts to rewrite it.
1) Matthew 28. There is a great deal of controversy over the ICC definition of Matthew 28.
ICC teachings require that one become a disciple before being baptized. One is not saved unless on is a disciple before baptism. Matthew 28 18-20 is a corner verse in this belief.
I shall list the various biblical translations below.
In the NIV Matthew 28 18-20 : " Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit. And teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you".
As you can see the verse is in two separate sections. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, AND baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit.
Even the comma, part of the grammar from the greek translations is relevant. Should the verse have the comma after the word "them" I might be supportive of a conclusion other than that of christian orthodoxy.
In the KJV Matthew 28 18-20 : "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the son and of the Holy Ghost : Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.
Here there is no evidence to support the ICC claim that only disciples are to be baptized. The KJV clearly tells us to go and teach to the nations and baptize them.
The Greek translation of Matthew 28 18:20 : " And approaching - Jesus talked with them saying : was given to me All authority in heaven and on earth. Going therefore disciple ye all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatever I gave command to you;"
Here it is clear too. Disciples are asked to go out to all the nations to baptize them (nations) and teach them (nations) about Jesus.
To me these three translations of the same verse seem to have a different emphasis than what I was taught within the ICC.
I decided to look at what the other Gospels had written about what Jesus said at this time.
Mark 16: 15-16 was a parallel in verse, in this instance providing another look at what Jesus said at this time.
Mark 16 15-16 NIV : He said to them "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but who ever does not believe will be condemned."
Mark 16 15-16 KJV: And he said unto them, Go ye into all the word, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that beleiveth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that beleiveth not shall be damned.
Mark 16 15-16 Greek translation: And he said to them; Going into the world all proclaim ye the gospel to all creation. The (one) believing and being baptized will be saved, but the (one) disbelieving will be condemned.
ICC logic was along the lines of Matthew 28 states that we must baptize disciples in all nations. Therefore only disciples can be baptized. This is taken as a biblical imperative and a cornerstone for many "rebaptisms" with the ICC. If you were previously baptized before joining the ICC you will be made to study and be "shown" that because you were not a disciple at your baptism, it was not a real baptism and you need to be "rebaptised".
The emphasis I seem to read in all these verses is that Jesus is commanding all his disciples to go out to all the nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Mark 16 15-16 does not seem to back up an ICC definition that only disciples must be baptized and the "doctrinal" position of Matthew 28 taken by the ICC. Indeed it sets a different criteria in that belief and baptism save as opposed to being a disciple and then being baptized.
My conclusion was different to what I was taught by those leaders in the Sydney Church of Christ.
I could find no other group other than the ICC who preach this interpretation of Matthew 28. Indeed the ICC makes great sway in that they are the only "church" in the world that has this teaching.
So I decided to check out what, historically the early christians taught.
I discovered Matthew 28 translated from the Greek is explained as " Go and make disciples of all nations in my name" . This was the definition written down when the apostles were still alive, and being driven out of Judea. James the brother of Jesus having been martyred, and the Jerusaleum Christians still not having moved to Pella. This was written before 62 AD. Given the apostles forebearance in setting incorrect doctrine straight, that this could be said at the time in reference as the definition of what would become Matthew 28 when it would be written indicates that it had apostolic approval. My source for this is the historian Eusebius in his book (by Penguin) The History of the Church. He quotes this translation on page 68. He here is quoting directly from a text of the time.
If this early christian writing accepts the ICC definition is for you to decide. I believe that it does not, for if it was to proove the ICC definition that only disciples can be baptized, I think that it would have been stated. Indeed the early christian statement is quite valid when taken into context and compared to the Greek New Testament translations, and the KJV. These I see as being quite explicit about what we are to interpret Matthew 28 as.
Also I can find no apostolic doctrine taught in those days, that one must be a disciple before baptism.
Indeed in the bible I find many statements that do not state that being a disciple is a requirement for baptism. By omission they make a poor biblical basis for the ICC doctrine.
In deed is it not dangerous to make a point out of taking an unusual, definition, when the bible only makes a point in one instance ?
Below I list most of the biblical verses about baptism :
Mt 3:6 Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River
Mt 3:11 John the Baptist says "I baptize you with water for repentance, but after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire".
Mt 3:13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John.
Mt 3:14 But John tried to deter him, saying "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me"
Mt 3:16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water.
Mark 1:4 And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Mark 1:5 Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River
Mark 1:8 John the Baptist says " I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit".
Mark 1:9 At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.
Luke 3:16 John the Baptist said " I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy spirit and with fire.
Luke 3:21 When all the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too.
Luke 3:3 He went into all the country around Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
Jn 1:26 " I baptize you with water" John replied " but among you stands one you do not know.
Jn 1:33-34 I would not have known him except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me. The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.
Jn 3:22-23 After this Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them and baptized. Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized.
(I find this verse quite interesting as it shows that Jesus baptized in water as well as John. No mention is made that Jesus did anything different about his baptisms than John's. Indeed people could choose to be baptized by Christ or John the Baptist. We know that John never counted the cost with those he baptized, nor could they be disciples before he baptized them : he preached repentance before baptism.) I would urge you to read the discussion John the Baptist has with Jew(s) about baptism in Chapter 3.
Jn 4:1-2 The Pharisees heard that Jesus was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John, although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples.
Jn 10:40 Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days.
Acts 1:5 For John baptized with water but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1:22 Beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us
Acts 2:37-38 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles " Brother what shall we do ?" Peter replied " Repent and be baptized every one of you for the forgiveness of your sins" (I find this should be the verse where it would be stated any conditions about following Jesus such as being a disciple before baptism. The apostles preach and the people are impacted and come and ask what they should do ? All they are told is repent and be baptized, they are not told anything more.)
Acts 2:41 Those who accepted the message were baptized and about three thousand were added to their number that day. (That's 12 disciples converting 3000 people in one day, They only really had about 8 hours, at most to do this (probably less), which is a rate of 375 conversions an hour or 31 conversions per apostle per hour. This is a conversion every 2 minutes non stop for 8 hours.. Consider the ICC practice of counting the cost and making sure that someone is a disciple before they are baptized, then baptizing them. You cannot do this in 2 minutes.)
Acts 8:12 -13 But they believed Phillip as he preached the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, not men and women. Simon himself believed and was baptized.
Acts 8:16 They had simply been baptized into the name of Jesus.
Acts 8:35-39 Then Phillip began with that very passage of scripture and told him the good news about Jesus. As they traveled along the road they came to some water and the eunuch said "Look here is some water. Why shouldn't I be baptized ?" And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Phillip and the eunuch went down into the water and Phillip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Phillip away, and the eunuch did not see him again." (The Ethiopian eunuch gives us a narrative of the christian conversion process. Hear the word, be impacted by the word, then baptism and salvation. The eunuch then goes back to Ethiopia, according to Eusibius; and founds a very large strong, well founded scripturally, church independent of all the other churches of that time; that spread throughout the Kingdom of Ethiopia. The fact that this church was completely autonomous, the eunuch had no discipler, and that he never became a disciple or counted the cost before his baptism is a question the ICC has never been able to answer.) Acts 9:18 Immediately, something like scales fell away from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized.
Acts 10:47-48 Then Peter said " Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have. So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
Acts 10:37 You know what happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached.
Acts 13:24 Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to the people of Israel.
Acts 16:15 When she and members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her house.
Acts 16:33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized.
Acts 18:8 Crispus the synagogue ruler, and his entire household believed in the Lord, and many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized. (Again all that is required is stated here, a belief in Jesus, then baptism)
Acts 18:25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor, and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.
Acts 19:3-5 So Paul asked "Then what type of baptism did you receive ?" "John's baptism" they replied. Paul said "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is in Jesus. On hearing this they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. (Here when you go back to the Greek it becomes obvious that the people in Corinth that Paul is talking to, were baptized by John. Yet just by listening to Paul they receive the baptism from the Lord). In Greek it reads Verse 5 'And hearing they were baptized in the name of the Lord'
Acts 22:16 And now what are you waiting for ? Get up, be baptized, and wash your sins away calling on his name.
Gal 3:27 For all of you were baptized into Christ
Eph 4: 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
Col 2:12 having been buried with him in baptism
After many hours of searching through the bible, and also studying early church history, I could find no scriptural basis for the ICC view that one had to be a disciple before they were baptized.
Reading The History of the Church by Eusebius further expanded my search.
Clement an early christian who taught in Alexandria before 202 AD, and who wrote a book entitled "The Rich Man who Finds Salvation" recounts a true and authenticated tale of the exploits of the apostle John on pages 83-85 of Eusebius's book. It is a narrative of John, who when he came to Smyrna appointed the local bishop who had been appointed by the congregation, and not by him, to look after a young boy. The youth was baptized and accepted into the congregation. John left and the boy after a while, due to insufficient care by the bishop, began to go down the path of crime and sordid living. The boy eventually formed a gang of cut-throats and criminals and gained a fearful reputation for savagery and more. The youth even denounced Christ and mocked the church openly. The Apostle John returned, and inquired about the boy he had left in the care of the bishop. After being told that the boy was now the chief of a gang of criminals in the nearby hills, John set out to see him. There John confronted the boy now a man and when the man began to plead with tears flowing down his cheeks and shaking the following occurred. " But John solemnly pledged his word that he had found pardon for him from the Saviour; he prayed, knelt down, and kissed that very hand as being cleansed by his repentance. Then he brought him back to the church, interceded for him with prayers, shared with him the ordeal of continuous fasting, brought his mind under control by all the enchanting power of words, and did not leave him, we are told, till he had restored him to the Church , giving a perfect example of true repentance."
It is interesting to note that John the apostle here, did not rebaptise him. John accepted his repentance, prayer with him, fasted with him, chanted with him, was always with him - but never rebaptised him. It appears that for John, the Apostle, only one baptism was valid or necessary in his eyes regardless of what a person did.
Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria (247-264 AD) wrote a series of letters on baptism. In one such letter he writes to Xystus Bishop of Rome for advice about a member of his congregation. In this letter he refers to the man as having been baptized into a heretical group, yet returns to the church but feels much guilt and shame. The man is distraught and after witnessing a christian baptism,(having been sworn to perform blasphemies and the like at his own heretical baptism) is overwhelmed by the difference and pleads to be allowed to experience the same baptism, and for receipt of acceptance and Grace. "Now he was cut to the heart , and did not even dare raise his eyes to God, after starting with such unholy words and ceremonies (reference to his heretical baptism) And was so anxious to receive this unalloyed cleansing and acceptance and Grace. I could not presume to do this I told him that his prolonged communion with us made it unnecessary (This man had been in the congregation longer than Dionysius).He had listened to the Eucharistic prayers, and joined in the Amen. He had stood by the table and held out his hands to receive the holy food; he had received it, partaken of the body and blood of our Lord for long enough. "
Here was a historical example of a man baptized into a heresy, yet finding Christianity instead. He was so desirable of God's Grace and forgiveness that he wanted another baptism to gain what he believed was cleansing in the eyes of the congregation and God. Yet, here we see his original baptism was seen as valid. He was genuine in his repentance and wish to serve God, so another baptism was not seen as necessary.
Dionysius also wrote a letter to Philemon the Roman Presbyter. In it he talks about a rule on baptism left to him by Heraclas his predecessor (232-242 AD). "Those who came over from the heretical sects had seceded from the church.(seceded is not the right word - they were still regarded as members of the congregation when they were reported as regular pupils of some heterodox teacher). So he (Heraclas) expelled them from the church , shutting his ears to all pleas until they publically confessed all that they had heard from our militant opponents (2Tim 2:25) Then he readmitted them without requiring them to be baptized again, as they had received the holy baptism at his hands. I have learnt also this too, that the practice is not of recent origin in Africa; a long while back, in the time of my Episcopal predecessors, it was adopted at the most populous diocese and in Church synods, at Iconium, Synnada, and many other places. I would not think of upsetting their arrangements and involving them in strife and contention. "You shall not move your neighbor's boundaries, which were fixed by your ancestors"(Deut 19:14).
Here we see that christians who were baptized into Christ, and who left to follow a heresy, were accepted back without having to be baptized again. The original baptism was valid.
Dionysus also refers to his dealings with the Novatian heresy. Novatus was presbyter in the Roman Church who treated those who had shown weakness in the face of persecution with contempt. He regarded those who showed weakness in the face of persecution or struggles, as without any hope of salvation. Even if they did everything in their power to proove their conversion sincere and their confession wholehearted. So Novatus set himself up as leader of a new church, and they had much pride in their hearts and called themselves "Pure". They were the true church made up of the true unfailing believers. To deal with this situation the largest Synod ever convened occurred in Rome. It was attended by over 60 bishop's from all over Christendom, and a greater number of presbyters and deacons. No one bishop was superior to all the others. In those places that did not send representatives, the local pastors decided independently what to do about the problem.
"The result was a unanimous decree that Novatus, his companions in presumption, and any who thought fit to approve his attitude of hatred and inhumanity to brother christians, should be regarded as outside the church, but that brothers who had the misfortune to fall should be treated and cured with the medicine of repentance."
Bishop Cornelius of Rome wrote a letter outlining the doctrines of Novatus, space does not provide me with the ability to discuss many points or the personal history of Novatus and his movement. Novatus was known for his new improvised oaths that stated his church was the true church and that the giver would never return to the church he had left. He was known for placing undue pressure of people to give financially. A man who would seek to hide behind his position and power rather than answer questions asked of him. He deceived others and the common man to find glory and power for himself.
I would implore you to read this at your leisure. It is on pages 215-218 of Eusebius "The History of the Church"
Yet here we find that those christians, who fell under his spell and followed his heresy, were only required to repent to be accepted back into the christian church. No rebaptism was required. Repentance, confession of sin then acceptance was the answer.
Now the question of rebaptising heretics was a dividing one to the early christian church. Some bishop's refused to deal with church's that did rebaptise heretics - for this reason alone. Around 257 AD this was a thorny problem for the church. It was a very contentious issue that those who abandoned a heresy of any kind ought to be cleansed by baptism. Some church's would not speak to one-another because of this new introduced doctrine. Cyprian, pastor of Carthage was the first man of his time to maintain that only when cleansed through baptism ought they to be readmitted. Now that the persecutions were over and Novatus's heresy was dying, the question about what to do with the those who returned to the church from the heresies became a major question. Previous teachings and customs stated that in all cases all that was necessary was prayer and the laying on hands (see John the apostle's actions above). Yet some churches voted amongst themselves and began the practice of rebaptising those from heretical movements. This caused considerable tension within the church.
In my studies this is a crucial focal time when the concept of rebaptism took hold in parts of the christian church. It appears to be a man-imposed doctrine to assuage man's minds when the churches were getting large influxes of people from heretical groups. They felt a human need to "cleanse". There was no biblical or scriptural basis for it. Some evidence shows that the "rebaptism" teachings were strongest received in those churches that had problems with "works" based salvation doctrines.
I decided then to look further into what the ICC taught, or had taught in the past.
I found myself looking at the fact that Kip McKean, the founder of the Boston Movement/ International Churches of Christ, baptized in Gainesville Florida 11-30am on 11th April 1972 by Chuck Lucas. Kip would obviously have been taught about baptism from Chuck Lucas. I thought to myself what did Chuck Lucas teach about baptism ?
In the November 17th 1981 issue of Firm Foundation Chuck Lucas wrote that the prerequisites for baptism were " Faith, repentance and confession are essential prerequisites of baptism for the forgiveness of sins".
So I concluded Kip was baptized and taught by a man who made no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
I found a sermon from Kip McKean in 1984 " God is calling every man and woman to the ultimate purpose of having a relationship with him, to be able to have salvation. And how do we answer that call ? By having faith in Christ, by being cut to the heart about our sins, wanting to repent, and then to be baptized to have our sins forgiven. You know something that I feel is very, very important is that we just get very, very honest about where we stand with the Lord. You know if you've not been baptized, if you've not repented, if you've not had faith, then you're not right with the Lord."
A fairly fiery speech but pretty standard orthodox mainline christian. There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
In Jan 1985 he again preached about baptism " You see we needed to be reminded about just how we came to Christ. We had someone share the gospel with us --- the good news. We were touched in our hearts so much we wanted to repent of all of our sin. We wanted to make Jesus Christ number one in our life. We wanted to make him Lord. Then we were willing to confess Jesus before men and then we were baptized." " We can never compromise the issue of salvation - what it takes to be saved. You have to have faith, repent, confess and be baptized. that's just how it is"
There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost (maybe liberally termed confess) or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
I found a sermon from Roger Lamb from April 5 1987 Parts of the sermon are listed below " Therefore there is no condemnation for those in Jesus Christ (Romans 8:1). We are simply a group of sinners who admitted our guilt, repented of our sins, been baptized into Christ and been washed by the blood of his sacrifice." "God gives Grace to those who humble themselves, admit they are lost in sin, repent of their sins, and die to themselves in baptism - raised to walk a new life.
I found this sermon to preach what Kip would call the orthodox five point plan of salvation. Hear, Believe. Repent. Confess. Baptism. There is nothing added to the standard orthodox view of baptism accepted throughout the christian world. There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
Al Baird in October 1987 stated in a sermon " Basically, I believe we are in agreement on who is a christian. I mean we've been teaching it for years. We talk about hearing the gospel, believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God, and the result that it produces, of course, in Acts 2:37, is being cut to the heart, recognizing our lostness, our separation from God, what our sins have done. And then being able to ask the question "God what shall I do ?" Just be willing to lay down my life before the cross and saying "God here I am, I'll do anything you want me to". And then truly repenting, turning away from our sins. And being baptized into Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of our sins to receive the Holy Spirit. Anyone who does these things is a christian, anyone who does these things is in the brotherhood of God, is in the church."
There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
In Denver in 1987 Kip preached about his baptism at in Florida " I am saying I walked in there on a Friday night, University of Florida, 90 college kids. I mean even the guys were singing. That's commitment. I mean it was intense. I could understand the bible study and then on top of that afterwards everyone was hanging around afterwards in fellowship. I said "this is great I have found my church". Now for the next two months I just considered it my church. Then I was informed that it was not my church. I had to do a few things before I could be part of the church. I had to be baptized into Christ. It took me one day to make that decision and count the cost. I saw it. I knew this was it. I was baptized into the church of Christ."
Well here Kip states he had to count the cost before he could be baptized. There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
In May 1996 in Sydney Australia Kip preached the following " I just had my 24th spiritual birthday April 11th. That's pretty awesome.. Amen. [Note : This equated to Kip becoming a Christian on 11th April 1972 when baptized into the Crossroads Church of Christ] I can still remember.. I can still remember getting baptized. I was baptized at 1-30 in the morning. There (untranslatable) 4 people there at my baptism. And I remember I was so happy.. I was so excited. They asked me if I wanted to ride back to my dorm, I was living on campus.. I said no I just want to think about it .. I just walked all the way back and I got back to my room about 3 in the morning.. I just laid in my bed... I was so happy... all my sins were forgiven...I was a true christian... I had a purpose in my life.. I was just so excited. You ever been there Amen ? And you know the next day.. I was.. I was ..excited. I. I remember I went to my fraternity house.. to.. uh.. get lunch. And while I was there my .. kinda my Glory started to fade a little bit and I got a little intimidated. And all of a sudden when I was up getting a peanut butter and jelly sandwich one of the guys came on up and I thought in rather a loud voice go 'Kip I heard you got baptized '. It was 'Ssshh'. And then he goes ' Uh.. you know I'm kinda interested in doing that too' I go 'Oh hey lemme talk to you about that I.. Oh.. It's really awesome you know' And that's how it was as a baby christian. I mean you knew the Lord was with you. I mean you had that cowardice, you had that fear, but you knew that God was gonna always lead you in triumph Amen. And you were fired up to share, you were fired up to get people to church, fired up to see your family members become christians. I mean... church.. I mean you never wanted them to close doors. You wanted to stay around and fellowship and fellowship, then go out and eat and fellowship some more. You remember those days? I mean you'd get up.. you'd be so dead tired.. you'd be going I'm going to have an awesome quiet time. You remember that Amen. We see.. that should be the least glorious your life ever was as a christian. And that wasn't me. Oh I had my quiet times, I've got a lot of the Pharisee in me, mean after all.. (seriously) I'm the leader of the movement."
Here Kip refers to his one and only baptism. It was a Church of Christ baptism under the orthodox five point plan of salvation. Hear, Believe. Repent. Confess. Baptism. Here Kip McKean is saying in 1996, that his baptism, into the Church of Christ; a baptism that did not require having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, before baptism to become a christian is a true and valid baptism.
I found that page 240 of the book Shining like Stars (written by Douglas Arthur, Douglas Jacoby and James Lloyd) printed in 1987 had baptism as being described as " for those who want to be disciples" I found that page 250 of the book Shining like Stars (written by Douglas Arthur, Douglas Jacoby and James Lloyd) printed in 1987 summarized the New Testament teaching on conversion as "A: Hear the message - Rom 10:17, Acts 11:14 B: Believe - John 3:16, Acts 16:31 etc C: Repent - Luke 13:3, Acts 3:19 etc D: Confess Jesus as Lord - Rom 10:9, 1Tim 6:12 etc E: Be immersed - Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21 etc
I find that I am quite in agreement with the above, they meet the standard orthodox views on baptism again. They also interestingly enough do NOT refer to Matthew 28:12-20 at all. There is no mention of having to be a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian.
At the Boston 1986 World Missions Seminar Kip McKean preached " And let me just flat lay it out. If people have not had faith in Jesus Christ, if they have not been moved to the point of conviction to repent and to place Jesus Christ as Lord of their life. If they are not willing to confess Jesus as Lord on that day of baptism and for every day until the Lord comes again. And if they have not been immersed for the forgiveness of sins to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, my bible teaches me they are outside of Jesus Christ."
Again no mention of being a disciple, having to have the commitment to be a disciple, counting the cost or any other action that must be performed before baptism to become a christian. Again No mention of Matthew 28-12-20.
Then I started to find a change in doctrine around mid 1987.
In my 1991 Guard the Gospel the ICC teaching manual (pre - 1st Principles) in the Discipleship study it states the following. 6. Matthew 28 18-20 A. Command - make disciples (given to all) B. Who is a candidate for baptism ? Disciples C. You need someone to disciple you to maturity in Christ 7. Conclusion Questions 1. Am I a disciple ? 2. Am I am Christian ? 3. Am I saved ? 4. What do I need to do to become a disciple.
Here is written evidence that the ICC required in 1991 that a person be a disciple before baptism.
Kip McKean has preached the following in 1987 "For a long time in the Church of Christ and those that were raised in it (I appreciate that background and you need to) have been taught, dare we say it, the five point plan of salvation - hear , believe, repent, confess, and be baptized. Though I believe in that because I believe in the word of God, I believe an essential element has not been emphasized in the area of repentance. In fact ,it was the primary area that Jesus emphasized about this baptism. In Matthew 28:19 when Jesus appeared to the eleven on the mount before he ascended he said 'Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them (there they are) baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey my Father's commands'. I really believe, sisters, we need to get it straight who is a candidate for baptism. It is the individual who is a disciple. You say "Well, now, brother, that's not been taught through the years so often in the church of Christ." What does the book say ? You say " Well, now, brother, we didn't even use that terminology back in the days at Crossroads." What does the book say ? I think we also need to certainly appreciate our heritage without question and roots in the Lord's church , the church of Christ. But I think we also need to appreciate our roots in the Crossroads church. But you've got to understand that we are a process of restoration. The Holy spirit is working and it is not new truths that are being discovered but old truths are becoming clearer. There is a difference. Jesus said, Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them.
A lot of people in the church of Christ say 'Well we can't get along with you folks because your methodology is different'. That's the word. Listen, I am seeing there is a lot more than methodology that is different. There has become an innate doctrinal difference but they don't recognize it because it looks like a methodology. Our working with people to baptism and counting the cost they think is a methodology. I think not. It is a scriptural imperative. If it is a scriptural imperative, then it is not a humanistic methodology it is a command that we must obey. Then the bible says after they are baptized (and you only baptize disciples) then you are to teach them to obey everything the Lord has commanded. Why do people who come into our fellowships have so much struggle when they come on in ? Is it because we are just weird acting? We expect too much ? Or we've added things to the scriptures ? I think not. I think they are uncomfortable when they come on in because they have never been disciples in the first place. You see what happens is after a period of weeks and months, maybe even years, in our fellowship they get hammered around enough they eventually become disciples, but just for the first time have they become disciples. They think "Well I'm okay because I was baptized to get saved many years ago". Let me tell you something, if you have struggled to come into our friendships and even now you're a high powered sister, I praise God that you are a disciple. But all the commitment in the world and even being a disciple does not save you. You must respond to Jesus with the commitment of a disciple and then only then can you be baptized to be saved. A lot of people ask questions, "Why have some of the sisters been rebaptised ?" Let me tell you something. No-one has been rebaptised around here. Not a single person has been re-baptized around here. I believe in only one baptism.
Here a doctrinal change occurs in the ICC teaching. Not only must one be a disciple before baptism, but you must have responded with the commitment of a disciple before baptism Kip is arguing that if you were baptized previously you baptism did not count because you were not a disciple before baptism, and you did not responded with the commitment of a disciple before baptism. Your first baptism is invalid - it was not really a baptism; therefore no-one is rebaptised.
On December 20 1987 Elena McKean wrote the following article in the Boston Bulletin. "Too few churches call people to make the decision to be disciples at baptism (Matthew 28:19). Jesus says if you have not done this your baptism is invalid. Many people from the church of Christ are deceived. Only baptized disciples will be willing to go anywhere, do anything, and give up everything for the cause of winning the world for a few of the lies Satan spread about the critical area of salvation."
Again doctrine has changed to baptized disciples.
On May 17th 1989 Al Baird was interviewed on radio in Boston. He stated " I was rebaptised in April of 1987" . In September 1987 Al Baird preached a sermon discussing the rebaptism issue entitled "Go Baptize Disciples Only" in which he stated " Now you may ask "Why do we have as many quote rebaptisms as we do? Number one, I don't think there is any such thing as rebaptism."
Here you have Al Baird admitting he was rebaptised 2 years ago, yet when he teaches a sermon on Baptism 5 months after his rebaptism, never refers to his rebaptism. His rebaptism in fact was kept hidden by the church and never refereed to publically, or in a church publication for 10 months.
On May 29 1988 Gordon Furgeson expressed his view about baptism in the Boston Bulletin. " For years, I have been puzzled by "christians" who were resistant to sharing their faith and to doing other things taught in the New Testament. I am no longer puzzled. Either these people never became disciples, or they quit being disciples. In either case they are not saved. Calling ourselves 'Christians" or "members of the church" means nothing. If we are not doing what disciples are commanded to do we are not saved. And my personal conviction is that many of those in 'churches of Christ' have never biblically repented, have never become disciples and thus are not Christians. A large number of people, including me, have faced the issue and have been baptized with a true disciple's repentance.
Here not only does Gordon express the view that unless we are not doing what disciples are commanded to do we are not saved (ie preaching salvation through works) but advocates only his new baptism is valid. He had to get rebaptised because he was not a disciple at his first baptism.
Joe Garmon during a church reconstruction preached the following " People in the churches of Christ who have not been discipled first and then baptized are not saved... we believe that those who have left here have left the church- have left the Lord. And we believe the churches of Christ in general do not teach, do not preach, do not believe in - as a matter of fact oppose - the doctrine of making disciples before baptism. And that because of that the vast majority of people in the church of christ are not saved.
Again we have the new theme of a person must be a disciple before baptism, along with the now rational deduction that if you were not a disciple before baptism, your baptism is invalid, and you are not saved.
I was amazed that this change had occurred and I had never been told about it. It was one of those things that you would never think to ask, I mean how could you know without being told. You are supposed to trust implicitly you discipler within the ICC. In all my time in the ICC and all the questions I raised, never was I even hinted at that baptism doctrine had changed. I was led to believe it had always been and always had been the same. When it was discovered that I had been hastily recruited and not really known about the need to be a disciple before baptism, no commotion was made. I was just thrown into classes like everyone else.
I then began to read the recent Restoration through Revolution articles written by Kip McKean. I was concerned at how they changed from version 1 to Version 2. I also read the following.
Restoration through Revolution 1 After writing about the 30 would be disciples (Para 14) that Friday night Kip then goes on to say (para 16) "Early on I developed a series consisting of nine bible studies on the "first principles" (Hebrews 6: 1-3). the members of the church were called to memorize these studies and then teach others to become christians. The most impacting was called "Discipleship" where from my study of scripture I taught what was clear in Acts 11:26. SAVED = CHRISTIAN = DISCIPLE, simply meaning you cannot be saved and you cannot be a true christian without being a disciple also. I purposely developed this study to draw a sharp biblical distinction between the Lexington (later renamed Boston) Church of Christ and all other groups. I taught that to be baptized, you must first make the decision to be a disciple and then be baptized. I saw people in and out of our fellowship had been baptized without this understanding and then, in time developed a disciple's commitment to make Jesus Lord of their life. I taught that their baptism was invalid because of a retroactive understanding of repentance and baptism was not consistent with scripture. Upon conviction by the scriptures most people in the Lexington (Boston) church of Christ were rebaptised." Two paragraphs (para 18) later he begins to talk about the events in the 4th year of existence, 1982.
The whole article is descriptions over the history of the ICC over time. !979 events are before 1980 etc. As you read you follow the events of the church year by year.
By placing this article in paragraph 16 the impression, is that Kip's teaching about baptism, the rebaptisms occurring and important doctrinal points were made back in 1979 when Kip started the Boston Church of Christ. He even states "I purposely developed this study to draw a sharp biblical distinction between the Lexington (later renamed Boston) Church of Christ and all other groups." Yet in 1979 the Boston Church of Christ was not teaching these doctrines. Yet in 1979 Al Baird had not been rebaptised.
Kip did not begin teaching his new doctrine until about mid 1986/7 - 7 years later Gloria Baird was rebaptised in October 1986. Al Baird was rebaptised in April of 1987.
An incorrect impression is given in the article, indeed a deliberate mis-information is done in that the time of the doctrinal change is never mentioned.
I know I and thousands of others, read this article, and assumed that the doctrine had always been the same today as it was in 1979. We were, I believe deliberately deceived.
Finally I decided to have a look at the baptism figures for the ICC. Here I ran into a problem. Around 1989 they stopped reporting baptisms. I found this disturbing as it seemed to indicate that there were retention problems. Membership numbers only were produced... then the membership numbers stopped being specific and began to be general and attendance numbers were exposed. To me this indicates that the ICC is afraid to state it's members and baptisms.
I have read reports from the ICC that have not been released to publically that show net retention rates (members + baptisms- leavings) as very low. In 1990 for instance this was -5%.
As I have written before, if I am in error then I seek correction. I wish to learn from this search into the past and study of the bible.
Martin Hinves
Ex member Sydney Church of Christ